How pre-adolescents use ethnolectal features in urban areas: A case study of German-speaking Switzerland - Melanie Röthlisberger - KU ...
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
How pre-adolescents use ethnolectal features in urban areas: A case study of German-speaking Switzerland Melanie Röthlisberger melanie.roethlisberger@es.uzh.ch Laura Rosseel laura.rosseel@kuleuven.be
How did it start
• Chani bleistift? (‘Can
I pencil?’)
Corpus Swiss-
German
children’s
speech?
28 June 2019 ICLaVE10 Leeuwarden Page 2
Previous research on Swiss-German dialects Focus on regional variation: • linguistic atlases (SDS, SADS) (e.g. Glaser & Bart 2015) • apps and online games (Leemann et al. 2015) Focus on historical data: • Wenkersätze 1930-2020 (Citizen Science, PI: E. Glaser) • ArchiMob corpus (oral histories, e.g. Samardžić et al. 2016) Focus on specific groups of speakers: • ethnolectal Swiss German (e.g. Tissot et al. 2011, Schmid 2017) • Youth language (e.g. Werlen et al. 2010, Galliker 2014) 28 June 2019 ICLaVE10 Leeuwarden Page 3
Our project → Language variation and change in language of children • Corpus-based & experimental • Focus on youngest speakers 28 June 2019 ICLaVE10 Leeuwarden Page 4
Objectives of the project
1) To take stock of the linguistic variables that children use, exploring
the social/demographic parameters that correlate with that use (e.g.
language contact),
à bottom-up & top-down
2) and to assess the degree of overlap with the general adult speech
community (and the diffusion process observed elsewhere; Leemann
et al. 2014, Kolly et al. 2015)
à top-down
3) To explore the social meaning that children attach to these variables
and features using a series of explicit and implicit language attitude
studies
à experimental
28 June 2019 ICLaVE10 Leeuwarden Page 5
Today: Bottom-up & Top-down • To take stock of the linguistic variables that children use, exploring the social/demographic parameters that correlate with that use (e.g. language contact), • Focus on the use of ethnolectal features • and investigate patterns of variation of these features among the youngest dialect speakers • why ethnolectal features → only adolescents and adults? • Myth – urban versus rural areas 28 June 2019 ICLaVE10 Leeuwarden Page 6
Research questions 1. Which ethnolectal features are used by children? 2. Is there a difference between urban and rural areas? Why (not)? 28 June 2019 ICLaVE10 Leeuwarden Page 7
Outline 1. Setting the stage 2. Ethnolectal Swiss German 3. Method and data acquisition 4. Some results 5. Conclusion & next steps 28 June 2019 ICLaVE10 Leeuwarden Page 8
Ethnolectal Swiss German
• primary ethnolect: language/style used by speakers with migrant
background (intraindividual variation); reflect features of their ‘ethnic’
language
• secondary ethnolect: imitation and exaggeration of primary features
by youtubers and comedians
• tertiary ethnolect: linguistic features of primary ethnolect used by
adolescents without migrant background for stylistic purposes
(see Auer 2002, Tissot et al. 2011, Schmid 2017)
28 June 2019 ICLaVE10 Leeuwarden Page 9Primary features of ethnolectal Swiss German
5 ethnolectal features* (Tissot et al. 2011, see also Auer 2002)
1. change of genus of nouns (e.g. neuter instead of masculine)
2. omission of (definite) articles
3. omission of (locative) prepositions
4. omission of anaphoric personal pronouns (e.g. ‘es’)
5. change of verb valency (e.g. used with accusative instead of dative, or
with ‘wo’ instead of ‘wohin’, or used with other prepositions than what
is traditionally the case)
28 June 2019 ICLaVE10 Leeuwarden Page 10Data collection
• collect naturalistic spoken language
• at the moment:
• recordings of 2 class groups of primary school children aged 8-12 in
Winterthur (39 children) including metadata
• one class in a rural area (N=21), one class in an urban area (N=18)
28 June 2019 ICLaVE10 Leeuwarden Page 11Hegi: 26% born outside of
Switzerland
Eidberg: 9% born
outside of Switzerland
28 June 2019 ICLaVE10 Leeuwarden Page 12Participants Urban area (Hegi) Rural area (Eidberg) ~ 190 min ~ 175 min Age f m Age f m 8 years 1 0 10 years 0 1 9 years 5 4 11 years 5 7 10 years 4 4 12 years 4 4 TOTAL 10 8 TOTAL 9 12 28 June 2019 ICLaVE10 Leeuwarden Page 13
Survey
• paper / online (QR code à Qualtrics, KU Umfrage(zum(Sprachgebrauch(von(schweizerdeutsch8sprachigen(Kindern((Alter(6812(Jahre)(
Vielen&Dank,&dass&Sie&Ihr&Einverständnis&gegeben&haben,&dass&Ihr&Kind&an&dieser&Studie&teilnimmt.&Damit&wir&erkennen&können,&inwiefern&der&
Sprachgebrauch&Ihres&Kindes&durch&das&Umfeld&zu&Hause,&in&der&Schule&und&unter&Freunden&beeinflusst&wird,&ist&es&wichtig,&dass&wir&mit&diesen&
Informationen&näher&vertraut&sind.&Deshalb&wären&wir&sehr&froh,&wenn&Sie&nachfolgende&Angaben&ausfüllen&könnten.&Sie&können&aber&auch&den&QR&
Leuven)
Code&scannen&und&die&Umfrage&online&ausfüllen.&
&
&
&
&
1.(Information(zum(Kind(
"
Name"(Vorname,"Nachname)"
"
Schule"und"Klasse""
• questions on Wohnort"
Geburtsdatum"
"
"
• child: name, gender, nationality,
"
Geschlecht"
"
Nationalität"
Muttersprache"(z.B."Dialekt)" "
mother tongue, etc Andere"Sprachen,"die"das"Kind"spricht"
"
"
• family: mother tongue, education,
Anzahl,"Geschlecht"und"Alter"von"Geschwistern""
2.(Familiäres(Umfeld:(
other languages
( Muttersprache( Höchste(Ausbildung( Beruf( Andere(Sprachen(
" " " "
Erziehungsberechtige/r"1"
"
" " " "
Erziehungsberechtige/r"2"
"
• languages spoken at home and in
Weitere" " " " "
erziehungsberechtige"
Personen"(z.B."
Grossmutter)"
school
"
3.(Welche(Sprachen(werden(zu(Hause(gesprochen?"
(
(
• time spent on media
(
4.(Welche(Sprachen(spricht(Ihr(Kind(in(der(Schule((z.B.(Pausenhof,(Unterricht)?(
• mobility
"
"
"
• contact with people speaking other (
1"
languages
"
28 June 2019 ICLaVE10 Leeuwarden Page 14Recordings: Task 1 • Diapix task (Van Engel et al. 2010; Baker & Hazan 2011) • ‘spot-the-difference’ game • elicits spontaneous speech interaction between two participants • participants have to try and work out 5 differences between their own and their partners’ picture without seeing their partners’ picture. 28 June 2019 ICLaVE10 Leeuwarden Page 15
Recordings: Task 2 • story cubes • take turns in creating a story • elicits more naturalistic speech than the diapix task 28 June 2019 ICLaVE10 Leeuwarden Page 16
Results
1. change of genus of nouns (e.g. neuter instead of masculine)
2. omission of (definite) articles
3. omission of (locative) prepositions
4. omission of anaphoric personal pronouns (e.g. ‘es’)
5. change of verb valency (e.g. used with accusative instead of
dative, or with ‘wo’ instead of ‘wohin’, or used with other
prepositions than what is traditionally the case)
28 June 2019 ICLaVE10 Leeuwarden Page 171. Change of genus of nouns
• often occurs in PPs
feminine → masculine
A: Wie isch bi dir bim Türe de Strich?
(‘How is the line at door on yours?’)
feminine → masculine
B: Bi mir staht au no en bueb do mit emene biene
und emene glace
(‘There is also a boy on mine with a bee and an
icecream’)
28 June 2019 ICLaVE10 Leeuwarden Page 182. Omission of definite articles A: Uf welli Siite luegt dine? (‘Which way is yours looking?’) B: Mine uf ehm shopsiite. (’Mine – to – ehm – shop.’) A: Isch bi dir Häsli wiis? (‘Is rabbit white on yours?’) 28 June 2019 ICLaVE10 Leeuwarden Page 19
Which ethnolectal features are used in the urban area?
ü change of genus of nouns (e.g. neuter instead of masculine)
ü omission of (definite) articles
3. omission of (locative) prepositions
4. omission of anaphoric personal pronouns (e.g. ‘es’)
ü change of verb valency (e.g. used with accusative instead of
dative, or with ‘wo’ instead of ‘wohin’ or used with other
prepositions than what is traditionally the case)
ü incongruency in complex nominal phrases
28 June 2019 ICLaVE10 Leeuwarden Page 20Which ethnolectal features are used in the rural area?
ü change of genus of nouns (e.g. neuter instead of masculine)
2. omission of (definite) articles
3. omission of (locative) prepositions
4. omission of anaphoric personal pronouns (e.g. ‘es’)
5. change of verb valency (e.g. used with accusative instead of
dative, or with ‘wo’ instead of ‘wohin’ or used with other
prepositions than what is traditionally the case)
6. incongruency in complex nominal phrases
28 June 2019 ICLaVE10 Leeuwarden Page 21Who are those children?
• children using ethnolectal features in general have
– another language than Swiss German as their mother tongue
– frequent (daily) contact with speakers of other languages
• in the rural area, small number of children with ethnolectal features,
but all adhere to the above pattern
• in the urban area, higher frequency of children with ethnolectal
features including also children with Swiss-German as their
mother tongue and infrequent language contact
28 June 2019 ICLaVE10 Leeuwarden Page 22Perceptional aspect: “Does your child speak
differently than you?”
Results from survey with parents’ responses:
- e.g. new words like "Alter", "voll heftig”
- e.g. more English words/sentence fragments
- e.g. a different conversational style due to the media (child’s self-report!)
Urban vs rural responses
Area Child speaks Child does not
NA
differently speak differently
urban (Hegi) 10 (55.5%) 8 (45.5%) –
rural (Eidberg) 6 (28.6%) 14 (66.6%) 1 (4.8%)
28 June 2019 ICLaVE10 Leeuwarden Page 23As a way of conclusion…
• children use ethnolectal features reported in adolescent speech
• the most frequent feature = change of genus of nouns
• use of features dependent on degree of contact and mother tongue
• more children in the urban area use ethnolectal features, including
those with Swiss-German as mother tongue and infrequent language
contact
• children in the urban area are more often perceived to speak
differently from their parents than those in the rural area
Ethnolectal features are enregistered to index urban
rather than ethnic identity?
28 June 2019 ICLaVE10 Leeuwarden Page 24Next steps q transcribe interviews (X-SAMPA) q conduct follow-up experiments (acquisition of social meaning) q take stock of children’s social network (who talks to whom?) q extend to other schools and other age groups (kindergarten!) q assess impact of other factors (e.g. amount of time spent watching tv or using social media, absence/presence of older siblings, etc.) 28 June 2019 ICLaVE10 Leeuwarden Page 25
Thank you to: • Eline Zenner and Nane Mertens for sharing their survey • Lena Zipp for the equipment • Valerie Hazan for sharing the diapix pictures • the teachers of the primary schools for allowing us to record their children • the parents for allowing us to record their children • and the children (who seemed to have as much fun as I did)! 28 June 2019 ICLaVE10 Leeuwarden Page 26
THANK YOU slides available at: www.melanie-roethlisberger.ch 28 June 2019 ICLaVE10 Leeuwarden Page 27
References Auer, Peter. 2002. ‚Türkenslang‘: Ein jugendsprachlicher Ethnolekt des Deutschen und seine Transformationen. In Annelies Häcki Buhofer (ed.). Spracherwerb und Lebensalter. Tübingen: Francke, 255-264. Baker, Rachel & Valerie Hazan. 2011. DiapixUK: task materials for the elicitation of multiple spontaneous speech dialogs. Behavior research methods 43(3), 761–770. Galliker, Esther. 2014. Bricolage: Ein kommunikatives Genre im Sprachgebrauch Jugendlicher aus der Deutschschweiz. Frankfurt: Peter Lang. Glaser, Elvira & Gabriela Bart. 2015. Dialektsyntax des Schweizerdeutschen. In Roland Kehrein, Alfred Lameli & Stefan Rabanus (eds.). Regionale Variation des Deutschen: Projekte und Perspektiven. Berlin: De Gruyter, 81–108. Kolly, M.-J., Leemann, A. & Matter, F. (2015). Analysis of spatial variation with app-based crowdsourced audio data. Proceedings of Interspeech 2015, 1710-1714. Leemann, Adrian, Marie-José Kolly, Ross S. Purves, David Britain & Elvira Glaser. (2015). Crowdsourcing language change with smartphone applications. PLoS ONE 11(1), online. Leemann, A., Kolly, M.-J., Werlen, I., Britain, D. & Studer-Joho, D. (2014). The diffusion of /l/-vocalization in Swiss German. Language Variation and Change 26(2), 191-218. 28 June 2019 ICLaVE10 Leeuwarden Page 28
References Samardžić, Tania, Yves Scherrer & Elvira Glaser. 2016. ArchiMob - A Corpus of Spoken Swiss German. Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2016). Portorož, Slovenia. Schmid, Stephan. 2017. Differenzierungsprozesse im Sprachgebrauch von Jugendlichen in der Deutschschweiz: zur sozialen Interpretation von ethnolektalen Sprechweisen in Schweizer Medien. Bulletin Suisse de Linguistique Appliquée (Vals-Asla) 1, 105- 116. Statistik Stadtentwicklung Winterthur; Einwohnerkontrolle NEST, https://stadt.winterthur.ch/themen/die- stadt/winterthur/statistik/bevoelkerung [accessed 15 October 2018] Tissot, Fabienne, Stephan Schmid & Esther Galliker. 2011. Ethnolektales Schweizerdeutsch: Sozio-phonetische und morphosyntaktische Merkmale sowie ihre dynamische Verwendung in ethnolektalen Sprechweisen. In Elvira Glaser, J.E. Schmidt & Natascha Frey (eds.). Dynamik des Dialekts: Wandel und Variation. Stuttgart: Steiner, 319-344. Van Engen, Kristin. J., Melissa Baese-Berk, Rachel Baker, Arim Choi, Midam Kim & Ann R. Bradlow. 2010. The Wildcat Corpus of Native-and Foreign-accented English: Communicative Efficiency across Conversational Dyads with Varying Language Alignment Profiles. Language and Speech 53(4), 510–540. Werlen, Erika, Esther Galliker & Fabienne Tissot. 2010. Konzeptuelle Zugänge zu intralingualer Variation: Dialekt und Standardgebrauch in Gesprächen Deutschschweizer Jugendlicher. In Jens Normann Jørgensen (ed.). Vallah Gurkensalat 4U & Me! Current perspectives in the study of youth language. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 229-244. 28 June 2019 ICLaVE10 Leeuwarden Page 29
You can also read
